PRETTY AS A PICTURE?
May 28, 2008 - 9:00 pm
Anyone who has ever succumbed to the fast-food siren has had the experience: You're sitting in front of the TV -- or leafing through the Sunday newspaper, or looking at a billboard as you drive down the road -- and you see the most delicious-looking burger or sub or pizza you've ever seen in your life. The meat and fillings are so generous they hang over the bun, the cheese is melted perfectly, the bacon is just crisp enough and not burned. Your mouth starts to water and a serious craving kicks in.
So then you make a stop at the appropriate burger stand or sub shop or pizza joint to purchase the item of your desire. And it's just sad: limp lettuce, a paltry portion of meat, hard, unmeltable cheese. It's not every time, of course, that the reality pales so horribly in comparison to what was promised, but it happens more often than not.
And so, tempted by a few of those ads ourselves lately, we decided to do a little test: How does the real thing, photographed in the Review-Journal photo studio, compare to its seemingly airbrushed, retouched, props-standing-in-for-real-food image?
We'll let you be the judge. (All prices represent what we paid last week, plus tax. All have multiple locations unless otherwise noted.)
Comparison photos by Craig L. Moran/Review-Journal.
Download PDFs of the comparisons • Arby's • Burger King • Papa John's • Port of Sub's • Raising Canes • Schlotzskys • Carl's Jr. • Firehouse Subs • Jack in the Box